yeachan-heo/oh-my-claudecode/tdd

TDD

Red-green in small steps, at seams that were agreed in advance. In a launch run the seam list is C2's approved output; outside launch, agree the seams with the user before the first test exists — a seam nobody approved gets no tests.

The loop

One test → one implementation → repeat:

1. Write the next test at a seam. Run it. Watch it fail for the reason you expect — a test that cannot fail is not a test.
2. Implement the smallest change that turns it green.
3. Repeat. Each test is a tracer bullet: a narrow but complete path through the behavior, not a layer finished in isolation.

Rules

• Expected values come from an independent source of truth — a spec line, a worked example, a documented output. Never from the implementation under test: a test that asserts what the code happens to do is a mirror, not a check.
• Substitute at the seam's declared boundary class only — in-process, locally substitutable, owned-remote port, or true-external, the class C2 records for each seam. No substitutes inside the boundary the test is exercising.
• Refactoring is not part of the loop. It belongs to the review stage; the repair worker owns it. Do not refactor mid-red-green.
• A bug fix starts with the failing test that reproduces it — reproduction before theory, the debugger's rule.
• When proposing a seam, say in one line what it catches and what it lets through — a seam choice nobody can price is a guess, not a decision.

When no seam fits

If the behavior cannot be tested at any approved seam, stop and say so: report the missing seam as a finding (it feeds architecture-survey and refit) rather than inventing a seam or testing through internals.

Output

• The seam list used, with boundary classes and each seam's catch/miss line
• Red/green evidence — the failing run and the passing run
• Any seam-absence findings